Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #666664

Re: The problem of simultaneity

From Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: The problem of simultaneity
Date 2025-10-16 06:39 +0200
Message-ID <mlbauuFf3ktU2@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References (10 earlier) <LTL5R06ZZHzFv-F-2xx4FpjgHEE@jntp> <ml3ihhF2j2qU1@mid.individual.net> <10cl7l0$2rj0p$1@dont-email.me> <ml920oF3casU2@mid.individual.net> <10cnpn8$3iaka$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

Am Mittwoch000015, 15.10.2025 um 11:32 schrieb Mikko:
> On 2025-10-15 07:54:47 +0000, Thomas Heger said:
> 
>> Am Dienstag000014, 14.10.2025 um 12:11 schrieb Mikko:
>>> On 2025-10-13 05:59:58 +0000, Thomas Heger said:
>>>
>>>> Am Samstag000011, 11.10.2025 um 11:28 schrieb Richard Hachel:
>>>>> Le 11/10/2025 à 09:13, Thomas Heger a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Einstein's relativity theory isn't relativistic at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TH
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>> It's relativistic.
>>>>> But the problem is that it confuses everything, and it leads to 
>>>>> nonsense if you take it a step too far.
>>>>> For example, Albert Einstein, who is considered a god, was unable 
>>>>> to understand the difference between the relativity of chronotropy
>>>>> and the relativity of durations, which is what Dr. Richard Hachel, 
>>>>> who is considered a crank, does.
>>>>> It's the history of humanity in real life.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's take Langevin's traveler as an example; Hachel is very 
>>>>> precise about the terms. On the traveler's return, for example, his 
>>>>> chronotropy beats slower than that of the terrestrial traveler (as 
>>>>> on the outward journey), but his watch nevertheless runs faster.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would use other words, but actually had the same impression of 
>>>> Einstein's text.
>>>>
>>>> I meant that time is always an interval, while Einstein thought 
>>>> about time as linear and countable.
>>>>
>>>> But usually we use some starting point as reference, while often 
>>>> that isn't mentioned.
>>>>
>>>> What makes no sense, that are terms like 'bestimmte Ära' (certain 
>>>> era), because eras are not numbered.
>>>>
>>>> Also this concept of 'linear time' (embedded in 'big-bang theory') 
>>>> is most likely wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Einstein also used 'external time', which is similar to Newtons 
>>>> 'absolute time', while didn't use Poincare's 'local time'.
>>>>
>>>> So, in my opinion SRT isn't 'relativistic' enough.
>>>
>>> The problem with the word "time" (and many other words) is that in
>>> Common Language it is used for many different meanings. When clearer
>>> expression is desired different words should be used for different
>>> meanings. Often, and in particular for discussing physics, it is
>>> best to restrict the meaning of "time" when used as a nout to
>>> expressions that can be used as an answer to the questions that ask
>>> when someting happens, i.e., values of a time coordinate of an event.
>>> The word "duration" can be used for difference of two times. But even
>>> in physics discussions it is usually assumed that the participants can
>>> understand from context which of the multiple meanings of "time" is
>>> used.
>>
>> To treat time as a coordinate is  a VERY bad idea!
>>
>> This is so, because with 'coordinates' we usually mean positions in 
>> space.
> 
> By "coordinates" we usually mean a tuple of (usually continuous) functions
> from elements of a some spece (the physical space or spacetime or some
> abstract mathematical space) or a part of one with the property that
> the tuple of the values of those functions for one point identifies the
> point.
> 

Actually we mean the entries of a tupel with 'coordinates'.

The tupels themselves are mostly vectors.


It is also not a very good idea to confuse mathematical and physical spaces.

With 'physical space' we usually adress 'the universe' or something similar.

But we could make a vector out of a coordinate very easily, if we create 
a tupel, that has only one non-zero entry.

This is allowed in physical space only for three coordinates, while time 
has only one entry.

Since we have only one time position available (in a four-tupel), we 
cannot treat time as a coordinate of physical space (because three 
positions of a four-tupel are already occupied by the three real axes of 
space).

To solve this issue and to allow time to be threedimensional, too, I had 
the suggestion to use bi-quaternions.

Then time is locally imaginary and remains imaginary, even if the entire 
system is rotated.

Then 'space' would become 'time dependent' and matter filling that 
space, too.

TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-01 00:46 +0000
  Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-01 07:06 +0200
    Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-01 07:44 +0000
      Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-01 11:07 +0200
        Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-01 09:45 +0000
          Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-01 13:02 +0200
            Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-01 11:31 +0000
              Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-01 13:37 +0200
    Re: The problem of simultaneity Dan Wawrzaszek <kr@wskenezr.pl> - 2025-10-01 13:10 +0000
    Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-01 13:39 +0000
      Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-01 16:32 +0200
        Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-01 09:47 -0700
          Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-02 09:52 +0200
            Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-04 20:39 +0200
              Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-05 11:00 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-05 12:38 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-05 12:43 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-05 10:22 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-05 14:01 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-05 23:56 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-06 21:13 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-07 10:05 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-07 10:51 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-07 14:37 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Tommy Bagirov <yggoo@iooma.ru> - 2025-10-07 21:48 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-07 15:22 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Shannon Bekovich-Cherkassky <sciaa@ssiivsoea.ru> - 2025-10-08 10:28 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-08 00:08 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Fidencio Bagdasarov <ia@ddo.ru> - 2025-10-08 10:31 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-07 15:08 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-09 09:32 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-09 11:28 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-11 09:11 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-09 14:08 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-09 16:21 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Derric Bezumov <eebmm@dbdv.ru> - 2025-10-10 15:10 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Darryn Belorusov <rodryo@nldulan.ru> - 2025-10-09 12:46 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-09 16:56 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-09 11:46 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-09 20:18 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Huey Moshetov <uve@veeo.ru> - 2025-10-10 07:12 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-10 10:44 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-10 10:51 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-10 10:48 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-11 09:18 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-11 09:28 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-13 07:59 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-13 21:59 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Williard Romeijnders <jimso@dilidi.nl> - 2025-10-13 20:36 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-13 13:45 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-14 07:53 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-15 09:44 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-15 10:58 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Dusty Wronski <yst@ok.pl> - 2025-10-15 10:26 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-16 06:22 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-15 20:05 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-15 20:49 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 19:15 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity squalk <sq@net.inv> - 2025-10-15 20:44 +0100
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-15 13:19 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-16 08:14 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-16 08:16 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-16 07:02 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-16 00:44 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-16 19:42 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-16 17:51 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-18 11:39 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-18 11:43 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-18 12:16 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-18 12:11 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-18 13:37 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-18 19:52 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-19 21:02 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-20 09:50 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-18 13:39 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-18 13:40 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-18 13:52 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Zackee Barazbiev <vbez@eaek.ru> - 2025-10-18 13:50 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-16 21:11 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-14 13:11 +0300
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-14 12:39 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-15 09:54 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-15 10:59 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-15 12:32 +0300
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-16 06:39 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-16 12:53 +0300
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-15 08:26 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-16 06:53 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-16 00:41 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-15 20:05 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-15 20:37 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 19:14 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-16 08:04 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-17 00:19 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-17 07:36 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-15 11:51 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maykel Schneijder <eaa@eleeadmia.nl> - 2025-10-15 18:59 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-11 21:43 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-12 13:03 +0300
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-12 12:33 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Dennett Poplawski <swpt@ltoea.pl> - 2025-10-12 10:53 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-12 21:13 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Elier Szczepanski <eee@spi.pl> - 2025-10-12 19:50 +0000
                Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-13 08:31 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-13 00:03 -0700
                Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-13 22:00 +0200
                Re: The problem of simultaneity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-10-13 13:54 -0700
    Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-02 09:20 +0200
      Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-04 21:00 +0200
        Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-05 11:16 +0200
          Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-05 13:51 +0200
            Re: The problem of simultaneity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-07 10:31 +0200
              Re: The problem of simultaneity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-10-08 21:58 +0200
  Re: The problem of simultaneity Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-10-01 07:45 +0000
  Re: The problem of simultaneity wugi <wugi@brol.invalid> - 2025-10-13 10:19 -0300
    Re: The problem of simultaneity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-10-13 15:43 +0200
    Re: The problem of simultaneity Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-13 13:47 +0000
    Re: The problem of simultaneity Jay Wojewódzki <jeazwak@kj.pl> - 2025-10-13 16:55 +0000

csiph-web